Contemporary/medieval?

IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #26,916 by Arkadiy 2/1/02 5:41:12 PM Reply	Contemporary/medieval? I think that was the worst failing of the movie. You see, magic in it is a bit too magical. It's too obvious that the movie is done by a muggle. Wizards in the book are no more awed by magic than you are awed by an electric bulb. In fact, they are more awed by an electric bulb. The movie leaves a taste of super-powerful demi-gods in my mouth, while in the book magic is simply different technology, to be studied and employed like ours. Remember "Where Wisards Stay Up Late"? That would be the closest non-fiction.
Post #26,939 by static 2/2/02 12:01:59 AM Reply	I dunno. You're right about wizards being in awe of technology like electricity - that comes through even stronger in later books. But I didn't think magic in the movie came across like you suggested. IIRC, the students were in awe of the older wizards, but only because they had learnt more. (Even Hermione - with two muggle-born parents - was not surprised at the magically shifting stair cases.) And I don't remember any of the adult wizards showing the least bit of surprise at magic. OTOH, there was a subtle muggle-ness about its POV. Harry was, after all, raised as a muggle. :-) Wade. "All around me are nothing but fakes Come with me on the biggest fake of all!"
Post #27,264 by Arkadiy 2/4/02 5:13:10 PM Reply	I guess it's all in the eyes of the beholder... For me, the first scene, where Dumbledore uses put-outer, sets the tone for the whole movie. It's not a "flick-flick-flick" of cigarette lighter, it's a complex weapon for killing lightbulbs. I guess I should try to ignore that one scene and see where it takes me.

Harry Potter in print (no spoilers). - (static) - (44) - Jan. 23, 2002, 09:25:42 PM EST

Thanks - fine review. - (Ashton) - (32) - Jan. 23, 2002, 10:17:30 PM EST

Some things I forgot to mention. - (static) - (31) - Jan. 23, 2002, 11:50:08 PM EST

Never understood the proscription of 'magic'. - (Ashton) - (30) - Jan. 25, 2002, 06:58:20 PM EST

Re: Never understood the proscription of 'magic'. - (hnick) - (24) - Jan. 25, 2002, 08:19:04 PM EST

General Question (for all) - (Ashton) - (23) - Jan. 25, 2002, 10:02:22 PM EST

For me, reading was weirdly constructed - (wharris2) - (3) - Jan. 26, 2002, 01:41:35 AM EST

Anyone remember those SRA reading comprehension modules? - (wharris2) - (2) - Jan. 26, 2002, 09:30:51 PM EST

Yep, SRA. IBM owned them in the past... - (a6l6e6x) - Jan. 26, 2002, 09:38:30 PM EST

Yep. - (admin) - Jan. 26, 2002, 09:38:52 PM EST

After some thought, no. - (hnick) - Jan. 26, 2002, 09:30:19 AM EST

No epiphany here. - (a6l6e6x) - Jan. 26, 2002, 11:22:55 AM EST

Could read in Kindergarten - (boxley) - Jan. 26, 2002, 08:44:40 PM EST

Nope, not really. -NT - (admin) - Jan. 26, 2002, 09:28:27 PM EST

I dunno, exactly. - (static) - Jan. 26, 2002, 11:28:00 PM EST

Second thought - (Ashton) - Jan. 27, 2002, 06:02:45 AM EST

Pretty much like Harris, can't remember when I couldn't. - (CRConrad) - (1) - Jan. 27, 2002, 10:04:18 AM EST

Addendum - (wharris2) - Jan. 27, 2002, 07:19:33 PM EST

Can't remember that far back - (JayMehaffey) - Jan. 27, 2002, 08:51:50 PM EST

That was some day! - (Arkadiy) - (5) - Feb. 1, 2002, 04:20:27 PM EST

Think I know - (Ashton) - (4) - Feb. 2, 2002, 05:10:20 AM EST

Oops. :) - (Arkadiy) - (3) - Feb. 4, 2002, 05:04:08 PM EST

Thanks! That helps me as well. - (a6l6e6x) - (1) - Feb. 4, 2002, 05:26:18 PM EST

Obviously: = "Greasy"! -NT - (CRConrad) - Feb. 4, 2002, 06:56:20 PM EST

Toosend tak - (Ashton) - Feb. 5, 2002, 08:59:35 AM EST

Earliest reading memory for me... - (Another Scott) - (1) - Feb. 1, 2002, 04:57:57 PM EST

Looks as if it's just Arkadiy & moi who can - (Ashton) - Feb. 2, 2002, 05:27:16 AM EST

Can't remember when I couldn't - (drewk) - (1) - Feb. 5, 2002, 09:29:45 AM EST

(wince) baby talking - (wharris2) - Feb. 5, 2002, 11:53:31 AM EST

Get inside their world view - (JayMehaffey) - (4) - Jan. 27, 2002, 09:06:11 PM EST

But even given that, there's no justification... - (CRConrad) - (3) - Jan. 28, 2002, 02:22:40 AM EST

Rah Rah CR! - (wharris2) - Jan. 28, 2002, 03:43:47 AM EST

Sorry, they are being consistent - (ben_tilly) - (1) - Jan. 28, 2002, 07:37:51 AM EST

Either/or, black/white: one could call it er, 'digital' :-\ufffd -NT - (Ashton) - Jan. 28, 2002, 11:54:48 PM EST

Sorry, but AFAICT Blyton totally sucks once you're past ~14. -NT - (CRConrad) - Jan. 24, 2002, 03:56:43 PM EST

Addendum: I've now seen the movie! [spoiler warning] - (static) - (4) - Jan. 28, 2002, 06:06:17 AM EST

Definitely agree re Malfoy - (Meerkat) - Jan. 28, 2002, 04:53:23 PM EST

Contemporary/medieval? - (Arkadiy) - (2) - Feb. 1, 2002, 05:41:12 PM EST

I dunno. - (static) - (1) - Feb. 2, 2002, 12:01:59 AM EST

I guess it's all in the eyes of the beholder... - (Arkadiy) - Feb. 4, 2002, 05:13:10 PM EST

Just finished #4. - (Ashton) - (4) - April 6, 2002, 12:56:42 AM EST

I had to re-read my original post! - (static) - (3) - April 6, 2002, 01:15:19 AM EST

Magic research results:__ the empty set. - (Ashton) - (2) - April 6, 2002, 01:59:09 AM EST

Re: Despite the many pins... - (a6l6e6x) - (1) - April 6, 2002, 11:09:34 AM EST

When ya gots all the money - what's left 'sides procreation? - (Ashton) - April 6, 2002, 04:55:08 PM EST

C:>_
364 ms